dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1949
share rss forum feed


Michieru2
zzz zzz zzz
Premium
join:2005-01-28
Miami, FL
reply to borborpa

Re: Customer Suggestions (How to improve Speakeasy)

Alright but the NID can be locked and after you don't have service with your telco there is no other reason for they to be inside your NID or on your property for that matter.

Either way the only pairs that should be coming in are the yellow/black wires anything else should strictly remain disconnected and have the closed circuit internal wiring where the red and green don't go through the NID itself but directly into the voip adapter thus not routing through the NID in the first place.

If it where like divdiv said Covad line powered then having the adapter in the first place would not be needed because that service will replace it.


sommerfeld

join:2006-01-24
Arlington, MA
reply to borborpa

said by borborpa:

For instance, if you disconnect the line at the NID, and some phone tech happens to stop by, sees them disconnected, and reconnects them...BAM...fried.
Yup, and that's why, when I moved my service to OneLink and then ported my phone number to speakeasy, I disconnected the original pair from my inside wiring on the inside of the house rather than at the NID. No sense in making it too easy for some telco tech to come back and screw things up.
said by borborpa:

That's why it's not really supported.
IMHO, what should be "not supported" is relying exclusively on a disconnect at the NID to isolate a TA from the telco.

TheOtherPete

join:2001-06-28
Boyds, MD

1 recommendation

reply to Michieru2

One more thing to consider, I'm not sure if all homes are wired this way but when I used a VOIP adapater to provide dialtone to my entire house's internal wiring I did not run a wire from the VOIP device to the NID, I simply disconnected the home phone line pair from the NID (and labeled it so that it wouldnt be accidently reconnected) and then plugged the VOIP adapter POTS output into any telephone jack in my house - since all jacks are wired together (in my home at least) it doesn't matter where you provide dialtone from (e.g. you dont need to start at the pair in the NID). YMMV.



Michieru2
zzz zzz zzz
Premium
join:2005-01-28
Miami, FL

I never heard of such a setup really. All home wiring setups have a individual cable all going to the NID.

So if you said you where able to achieve dialtone on all your lines then somehow all these cables are somehow connected.

Anyway setup 1 should be from a standard POTS. The idea I am getting of your setup is second one.
Setup 1

Setup 2


claudeo

join:2000-02-23
Redmond, WA
reply to Michieru2

If the house is wired correctly it is a simple matter of connecting the phone adapter to *any* phone jack in the house in order to feed all the phones. But first, of course, it needs to be disconnected from the telco. At the NID, disconnect those wires, roll them up (don't cut them!), and attach a good quality label to the coil saying something like "Do not use. Attached to special equipment inside." On both sides of the label.


TheOtherPete

join:2001-06-28
Boyds, MD
reply to Michieru2

said by Michieru2:

I never heard of such a setup really. All home wiring setups have a individual cable all going to the NID.
Sorry but that is just wrong ("all home wiring setups").

Are you saying each jack in your house has a separate cable that is run back to the NID? If so your NID must be significantly different then mine and must have many more cables going into it. In my house all the jacks are daisy-chained together like a Christmas light set (like in your setup 2 diagram), I assume this is just cheaper for the builder (less wire to run).

said by Michieru2:

So if you said you where able to achieve dialtone on all your lines then somehow all these cables are somehow connected.
I can't imagine a phone configuration in which all the phones jacks are not all interconnected at some point. That's the only way it can work, otherwise each jack would have its own separate line.

said by Michieru2:

Anyway setup 1 should be from a standard POTS. The idea I am getting of your setup is second one.
Your first diagram looks like you have all the jacks run back to a central place where they are all tied together and that in turn is connected to your NID by a single cable (which is different from every jack being run back to the NID, your earlier statement).

Regardless of how they are tied together (either of your two diagrams will work), if you disconnect all house wiring from the NID and leave all of the jacks interconnected then you can do what I said (connect the ATA to any jack and all jacks will work). If you look at from an electrical perspective this should be obvious.


CylonRed
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County
reply to Michieru2

quote:
All home wiring setups have a individual cable all going to the NID.
not mine...
--
Brian
America's Army Forum Moderator and America's Army Beta Tester


borborpa
Slipping Slowly Into Oblivion
Premium
join:2002-02-20
New Cumberland, PA
reply to Michieru2

If all jacks go individually to the NID, they are still connected AT the NID, and therefor interconnected.

In order to get dialtone from the VOIP adapter onto all phones, you only disconnect the incoming phone service pair from the NID, leaving all of your pairs connected to the red/green poles. Then connect the VOIP adapter to any jack inside, and it will power them all.

I was lucky, I have a punch-down block in the basement, the line comes in from the NID then out from there, so I disconnected the incoming, and the telco can't screw it up now.
--
God bless the whole world - no exceptions! [AIM - Once More Around]



Michieru2
zzz zzz zzz
Premium
join:2005-01-28
Miami, FL

1 edit
reply to TheOtherPete

Well from how the jacks are connected here this is basically the first setup is what I thought was the correct one since I seen it many times when I worked in construction.

But thanks for correcting me on that one. I never really seen a house daisy-chained in such a way but I do see electrical wiring that way so I suppose it's the same for phone. From a engineering stand point it does make sense considering the less tubing needed. But it's just one wire so if it where to fault if Jack 3 for example failed 1 and 2 will remain active but anything continuing up ahead will not work. So I can see the disadvantages of both these setups.

Also I was refering to how you did it when the main pair is at the NID and how that would work with all wires in the house if it where setup 1. But now that you say your lines are daisy chained it makes sense why all of them would work. Setup 1 consists of basically every jack having it's own wire and it tied to the NID, that's why it did not make sense to me. Plus you said you disconnected the Pair from the NID and from borborpa post it would not be interconnected. If you added a VOIP adapter to one jack and disconnected the pair from the NID. There would be no interconnecting going on.

Anyway thanks for clarifying that up, it makes sense now.



borborpa
Slipping Slowly Into Oblivion
Premium
join:2002-02-20
New Cumberland, PA

You can still have all the pairs in the NID in the house connected at the NID, and only disconnect the incoming from the CO, and all the lines will still be connected togetherm with the NID serving as a hub, so to speak.

My setup, as well as others, are different in that we can actually disconnect the internal lines from the NID completely, and run it that way.

For a great, graphical description of how to do it, see the following. »michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html
--
God bless the whole world - no exceptions! [AIM - Once More Around]


mackintire

join:2004-03-26
Pittsburgh, PA
reply to Michieru2

I suggested revamping the prices for connectivity before,
Here's a repost:
Suggest speakeasy DSL price changes

I suggest the following changes in price for the BASIC packages.

768kbps/128kbps $29.99
1.5Mbps/384kbps $39.99
1.5Mbps/768kbps $49.99
3.0Mbps/768kbps $74.99
6.0Mbps/768kbps $99.95

This suggested pricing structure would cause most current lower tier customers to strongly consider upgrading to the next level service. The defining of a 3.0Mbps level of pricing is something that quite a few speakeasy customers have requested and I think that this pricing structure would enable speakeasy to stay profitable until they can procure fiber access or some other higher bandwidth cost effective architecture.

When ADSL2+ is available:
1.5Mbps/384Kbps $29.99
1.5Mbps/768Kbps $39.99
1.5Mbps/768Kbps $49.99
3.0Mbps/768Kbps $69.99
6.0Mbps/768Kbps $89.00
8.0Mbps/1.0Mbps $99.99
Kinda hard to sell and make a profit unless you sell other services with these next two...
16.0Mbps/1.0Mbps $149.99 or more
24.0Mbps/1.0Mbps $199.95 or more

Please keep in mind that Speakeasy is a premium service and would not be able to offer equal speeds as comcast or other vendors at a lower price without affecting the quality of their services.

Your comments are welcome.

It is starting to grind on me a bit that I pay after taxes near $54 for 1.5/384 as I could get 2 verizon 1.5/768 connections for at or under that cost.


claudeo

join:2000-02-23
Redmond, WA

said by mackintire:

(snip)I suggest the following changes in price for the BASIC packages.
768kbps/128kbps $29.99
1.5Mbps/384kbps $39.99
1.5Mbps/768kbps $49.99
3.0Mbps/768kbps $74.99
6.0Mbps/768kbps $99.95(snip)
Looks reasonable to me. Were you thinking fixed IP or dynamic IP. Plus $2.50 per fixed IP address (minimum $4.99) would be OK too. And, of course, no more bogus "regulatory compliance fee" which is cost of doing business.

divdiv4

join:2005-10-15
Tucson, AZ

1 edit

said by mackintire:

768kbps/128kbps $29.99
1.5Mbps/384kbps $39.99
1.5Mbps/768kbps $49.99
3.0Mbps/768kbps $74.99
6.0Mbps/768kbps $99.95
Upstream bandwidth costs much more than downstream bandwidth. That middle tier is really close to that of an SDSL or T1 line that costs double and quadruple that amount. Speakeasy sells those connections as well and I doubt they want to cannibalize them.

said by claudeo:

said by mackintire:

(snip)I suggest the following changes in price for the BASIC packages.
768kbps/128kbps $29.99
1.5Mbps/384kbps $39.99
1.5Mbps/768kbps $49.99
3.0Mbps/768kbps $74.99
6.0Mbps/768kbps $99.95(snip)
Looks reasonable to me. Were you thinking fixed IP or dynamic IP.
Speakeasy does not offer dynamic IP addresses.
--
All I ever wanted to do was play my video games.


drmorley
Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-20
Park Ridge, IL
reply to Michieru2

Here's my only suggestion:

INCLUDE THE TAXES IN THE ADVERTISED PRICE OF YOUR PRODUCT!!!!



Michieru2
zzz zzz zzz
Premium
join:2005-01-28
Miami, FL

1 edit

Yes sir!



Michieru2
zzz zzz zzz
Premium
join:2005-01-28
Miami, FL

1 edit
reply to divdiv4

Only thing is that with a T1 your have guaranteed uptime. With SDSL you have 70% guarantee. Which also adds to the cost.

Anyway I am interested in a 3.0mbps/768kbps package for at least 59 or 69 a month without the taxes. ADSL that is.


divdiv4

join:2005-10-15
Tucson, AZ

1 edit

said by Michieru2:

Only thing is that with a T1 your have guaranteed uptime. With SDSL you have 70% guarantee. Which also adds to the cost.
Actually, Speakeasy gives you a 99.9% uptime guarantee on SDSL lines as well as T1 lines.
--
All I ever wanted to do was play my video games.


Michieru2
zzz zzz zzz
Premium
join:2005-01-28
Miami, FL

Then what the operator told me was incorrect or that has been recently changed.


divdiv4

join:2005-10-15
Tucson, AZ

said by Michieru2:

Then what the operator told me was incorrect or that has been recently changed.
He was incorrect. »www.speakeasy.net/business/sdsl/
--
All I ever wanted to do was play my video games.

mackintire

join:2004-03-26
Pittsburgh, PA
reply to divdiv4

T1 lines are full duplex. They can transmit and recive at the same time.

SDSL is half-duplex I belive. But the upload and download are symetrical.

ADSL has more download then upload and is half-duplex.

You can load a full duplex line aka (T1) with almost twice as many users as a SDSL line at 1.5Mbps. That would be the primary reason T1 is marketed as more expensive. Also Speakeasy gives T1 customers QOS priority over DSL users on thier network. Speakeasy's T1's are not normal T1s either. They are ATM lines that have the ability of a channelized T1 without the extra costs involved and are there for considered a better T1 then the norm.

And yes upload costs more then download.



Michieru2
zzz zzz zzz
Premium
join:2005-01-28
Miami, FL
reply to Michieru2

Any more suggestions out there?


tkdslr

join:2004-04-24
Pompano Beach, FL
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
·Speakeasy
reply to divdiv4

said by divdiv4:

said by Michieru2:

ADSL2 is really not a Speakeasy issue but more of a Covad issue on my end so until Covad does not roll out ADSL2 Speakeasy won't begin offering it.
Earthlink is already offering Covad ADSL2+ and Covad Line Powered Voice in certain areas. When is Speakeasy going to do the same?

I already have an ADSL2+ modem/router (based on TI's AR7 chipset »wiki.openwrt.org/TableOfHardware ), and a marginal line (14Kft + lots of DSL related crosstalk).

Sooo.. just for grins.. I defaulted my modem's DSL settings to T1.413 mode. And it worked, way better than I had hoped for!!

Improved overall performance, More reliable, etc.


nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
reply to Michieru2

For me, I'd love to move to VOIP. If SpeakEasy really wanted to sell me on theirs, they would help me figure out what to do with Verizon to reduce my POTS line bill to as close to $0/mo. They would also keep me up to date if/when other/better price options became available from Verizon (e.g., availability of "dry pair" service).

-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased)



borborpa
Slipping Slowly Into Oblivion
Premium
join:2002-02-20
New Cumberland, PA

I'm confused. My Verizon bill is $0.00. I have dry pair One Link DSL with VOIP. No Verizon. Do they not offer that in VA?
--
God bless the whole world - no exceptions! [AIM - Once More Around]



nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA

said by borborpa:

I'm confused. My Verizon bill is $0.00. I have dry pair One Link DSL with VOIP. No Verizon. Do they not offer that in VA?
I don't know whether they do or don't. What I am suggesting is, if SpeakEasy really wanted customers for OneLink, they'd do that legwork for you. Me? I'm busy and rarely home/available during regular business hours to screw around with Verizon. I also, due to my current utilization of my current SpeakEasy DSL, can't afford an administrative screwup that leaves me offline for hours/days. If I knew that I could call SpeakEasy and say, "hey, I want OneLink and I want you to take care of the details of porting my number, getting me converted to a dry pair and, oh, by the way, I can't have a DSL outage" and have confidence that they could do that, then I'd be all over OneLink. Right now, I don't have the impression that I could make a phone call like that.

-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased)


borborpa
Slipping Slowly Into Oblivion
Premium
join:2002-02-20
New Cumberland, PA

That's basically what I did. OneLink is the easiest part, because they will install that, get it up, then move the IPs from your old line to new, and bam!, it's up. That's what I did when I moved. I had the new line installed in the new house, then I called them as I was leaving the apartment, told them to move everything over, and when I got to the house it was working. Then when I had them install the OneLink, it was the same process.

SE handles all of the porting of your number, you don't have to call Verizon for it. They did it for me just fine. They got the VOIP up and running, then gave me the date that the port would go through, and then I just switched my home phones over and it was good.
--
God bless the whole world - no exceptions! [AIM - Once More Around]



KoolMoe
Aw Man
Premium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD
reply to nixen

Somewhat similar to borborpa, I am moving from shared to DSL. We have two phone lines - one for house and one for home business/fax. Shared DSL runs over the second line.

I had OneLink installed on a new line and spent a week testing it as I could. Seems solid and even a bit faster than my shared line. I kept web services running on the old line but routed the family's computers to the new line.

Happy it was stable, I asked for an IP switch, which they did in about 15 minutes at the scheduled time I requested.

I then moved some cables around on the switch and everything was working just as it was before - but over the new line.

Spent another week testing and all seems fine and stable. Just put in the request for the shared line to be cancelled. Should be done by tomorrow.

I'll then start the port of my second line phone # to my VOIP service (SunRocket). Once that's done, will drop the second VZ line totally (if the porting doesn't automatically do that anyway).

Will still keep the primary line on VZ though - need to reliability, 911, etc. But taking small steps away from VZ...
KM
--
War is a test of power, not a search for truth or justice. Can the violation of the primacy of love, destruction of life, and tearing of society truly be the will of God?



Michieru2
zzz zzz zzz
Premium
join:2005-01-28
Miami, FL
reply to nixen

To move or have Onelink the installation is free of charge of course if you live in a apartment contact your manager to give them access to the Telco Box.

Speakeasy will handle the rest, I just wish they just used Covad's line powered technology instead of sending you an adapter. It's a more reliable service and there is no need for adapters. Of course Earthlink is beta testing it with Covad so until Speakeasy supports it I won't know.

To the people who need a reliable telephone connection line powered VOIP is the way to go. Especially in the area I live where hurricane's puts total stress on the lines and if power goes out I know I will still have power from the CO for an analog phone. So people who live in area's which are prone to disaster will not be afraid to move to VOIP. Even a CAT2 can knock down cellphone towers so analog phone's are the first line of defense, while cellphone's are second since 1 tower can hold up to an 8 mile radius on all sides you can go on the roof (assuming it's still there) point your cell to the direction where was the less likely affected area and you will be lucky to receive no bars but the antenna sign at least. Then place a call while at the edge of the roof, might want to have 911 on speed dial just in case ^_^.


ryanski

join:2005-11-08
Houston, TX
reply to mackintire

said by mackintire:

T1 lines are full duplex. They can transmit and recive at the same time.

SDSL is half-duplex I belive. But the upload and download are symetrical.

ADSL has more download then upload and is half-duplex.

You can load a full duplex line aka (T1) with almost twice as many users as a SDSL line at 1.5Mbps. That would be the primary reason T1 is marketed as more expensive. Also Speakeasy gives T1 customers QOS priority over DSL users on thier network. Speakeasy's T1's are not normal T1s either. They are ATM lines that have the ability of a channelized T1 without the extra costs involved and are there for considered a better T1 then the norm.

And yes upload costs more then download.
Is this true? If so what do you mean the T1
s are not normal T1's? Does this mean they are faster? Lower latency? Also I have read that SE isn't on Point to Point they only offer Frame Relay does this make a huge difference? I heard that in some cases the latency can be the same there as well....

With T-1 can you monitor the amount of channels you use?

mackintire

join:2004-03-26
Pittsburgh, PA

Speakeasys T1 lines are framerelay for the last mile, which lowers their upkeep cost. And traffic shaped as a channelised T1 at their POP so it has the benefits of both.

Read about it here:

»www.speakeasy.net/pdf/SPK_BRO_T1services.pdf

Later,

Mackintire